Answer one of the Essay Questions located at the end of chapters 1-4 in Introduction to Business Law

| March 14, 2016

Question
Answer one of the Essay Questions located at the end of chapters 1-4 in Introduction to Business Law. Answer one question for each chapter. Each fully developed response (250-400 words) should include the following:

A clear introduction and conclusion
A thorough statement of the problem
A thorough explanation of the solution to the problem
Identify the chapter and question number you are answering.

APA format is not required, but solid academic writing is expected.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the assignment criteria and expectations for successful completion of the assignment.

Textbook

Beatty, J., Samuelson, S., & Bredeson, D. (2013). Introduction to Business Law, Fourth Edition. South-Western Cengage Learning.

ESSAYQUESTIONS (Chapter 1)

1. Union organizers at a hospital wanted to distribute leaflets to potential union members, but hospital rules prohibited leafletting in areas of patient care, hallways, cafeterias, and any areas open to the public. The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) ruled that these restrictions violated the law and ordered the hospital to permit the activities in the cafeteria and coffee shop. The NLRB cannot create common law or statutory law. What kind of law was it creating?

2. The stock market crash of 1929 and the Great Depression that followed were caused in part because so many investors blindly put their money into stocks they knew nothing about. During the 1920s, it was often impossible for an investor to find out what a corporation was planning to do with its money, who was running the corporation, and many other vital facts. Congress responded by passing the Securities Act of 1933, which required a corporation to divulge more information about itself before it could seek money for a new stock issue. What kind of law did Congress create? Explain the relationship between voters, Congress, and the law.

3. ETHICSThe greatest of all Chinese lawgivers, Confucius, did not esteem written laws. He believed that good rulers were the best guarantee of justice. Does our legal system rely primarily on the rule of law or the rule of people? Which do you instinctively trust more?

4. Burglar Bob breaks into Vince Victim’s house. Bob steals a flat-screen TV and laptop and does a significant amount of damage to the property before he leaves. Fortunately, Vince has a state-of-the-art security system. It captures excellent images of Bob, who is soon caught by police. Assume that two legal actions follow, one civil and one criminal. Who will be responsible for bringing the civil case? What will be the outcome if the jury believes that Bob did in fact burgle Vince’s house? Who will be responsible for bringing the criminal case? What will the outcome be this time if the jury believes that Bob did in fact burgle Vince’s house?

5. Kuehn v. Pub ZoneandSoldano v. O’Danielsboth involve attacks in a bar. Should they come out in the same way? If so, which way—in favor of the injured plaintiffs or owner-defendants? Or, should they have different outcomes? What are the key facts that lead you to believe as you do?

ESSAYQUESTIONS (Chapter 2)

1. Executives were considering the possibility of moving their company to a different state. They wanted to determine if employees would be willing to relocate, but they did not want the employees to know the company was contemplating a move because the final decision had not yet been made. Instead of asking the employees directly, the company hired a firm to carry out a telephone survey. When calling the employees, these“pollsters”pretended to be conducting a public opinion poll and identified themselves as working for the new state’s Chamber of Commerce. Has this company behaved in an ethical manner? Would there have been a better way to obtain this information?

2. When a fire destroyed the Malden Mills factory in Lawrence, Massachusetts, its 70-yearold owner, Aaron Feuerstein, could have shut down the business, collected the insurance money, and sailed off into retirement. But a layoff of the factory’s 3,000 employees would have been a major economic blow to the region. So instead, Feuerstein kept the workers on the payroll while he rebuilt the factory. These actions gained him a national reputation as a business hero. Many consumers promised to buy more of the company’s patented Polartec fabric. In the end, however, the story did not have a fairy-tale ending: five years after the fire, Malden Mills filed bankruptcy papers. The company was not able to pay off the loans it had incurred to keep the business going. Did Feuerstein do the right thing?

3. Many socially responsible funds are now available to the investor who wants to make ethical choices. The Amana Fund buys stocks that comply with Islamic laws. For example, it will not invest in holdings that earn interest, which is prohibited under Islamic law. The Ava Maria Fund is designed for Catholic investors, the Timothy Funds for evangelicals. The Sierra Fund focuses on environmentally friendly investments, while the Women’s Equity Fund chooses companies that promote women’s interests in the workplace. On average, however, these socially responsible investments earn a lower return than standard index funds that mirror the performance of a stock index, such as the Standard & Poor’s 500. Are socially responsible funds attractive to you? Do you now, or will you in the future, use them in saving for your own retirement?

4. When James Kilts became CEO of Gillette Co., the consumer products giant had been a mainstay of the Boston community for a hundred years. But the organization was going through hard times: its stock was trading at less than half its peak price, and some of its storied brands of razors were wilting under intense competitive pressure. In four short years, Kilts turned Gillette around—strengthening its core brands, cutting jobs, and paying off debt. With the company’s stock up 61 percent, Kilts had added $20 billion in shareholder value. Then Kilts suddenly sold Gillette to Procter & Gamble Co. (P&G) for $57 billion. So short was Kilts’s stay in Boston that he never moved his family from their home in Rye, New York. The deal was sweet for Gillette shareholders—the company’s stock price went up 13 percent in one day. And tasty also for Kilts—his payoff was $153 million, including a $23.9 million reward from P&G for having made the deal and for a“change in control” clause in his employment contract that was worth $12.6 million. In addition, P&G agreed to pay him $8 million a year to serve as vice chairman after the merger. When he retires, his pension will be $1.2 million per year. Moreover, two of his top lieutenants were offered payments totaling $57 million. Any downside to this deal? Four percent of the Gillette workforce—6,000 employees— were fired. If the payouts to the top three Gillette executives were divided among these 6,000, each unemployed worker would receive $35,000. The loss of this many employees (4,000 of whom lived in New England) had a ripple effect throughout the area’s economy. Although Gillette shareholders certainly benefited in the short run from the sale, their profit would have been even greater without this $210 million payout to the executives. Moreover, about half the increase in Gillette revenues during the time that Kilts was running the show were attributable to currency fluctuations. A cheaper dollar increased revenue overseas. If the dollar had moved in the opposite direction, there might not have been any increase in revenue. Indeed, for the first two years after Kilts joined Gillette, the stock price declined. It wasn’t until the dollar turned down that the stock price improved. Do CEOs who receive sweeteners have too strong an incentive to sell their companies? Is it unseemly for them to be paid so much when many employees will lose their jobs?

5. Many of America’s largest consumer product companies, such as Wal-Mart, Nike, and Land’s End, buy fabric produced in China by Fountain Set Holdings Ltd. Chinese government investigators recently discovered that Fountain Set has contaminated a local river by dumping dye waste into it. What responsibility do U.S. companies have to ensure safe environmental practices by overseas suppliers?

ESSAYQUESTIONS (Chapter 3)

1. State which court(s) have jurisdiction as to each of these lawsuits:

(a) Pat wants to sue his next-door neighbor Dorothy, claiming that Dorothy promised to sell him the house next door.

(b) Paula, who lives in New York City, wants to sue Dizzy Movie Theatres, whose principal place of business is Dallas. She claims that while she was in Texas on holiday, she was injured by their negligent maintenance of a stairway. She claims damages of $30,000.

(c) Phil lives in Tennessee. He wants to sue Dick, who lives in Ohio. Phil claims that Dick agreed to sell him 3,000 acres of farmland in Ohio, worth over $2 million.

(d) Pete, incarcerated in a federal prison in Kansas, wants to sue the United States government. He claims that his treatment by prison authorities violates three federal statutes.

2. ETHICSTrial practice is dramatically different in Britain. The lawyers for the two sides, calledsolicitors, do not go into court. Courtroom work is done by different lawyers, calledbarristers. The barristers are not permitted to interview any witnesses before trial. They know the substance of what each witness intends to say but do not rehearse questions and answers, as in the United States. Which approach do you consider more effective? More ethical? What is the purpose of a trial? Of pretrial preparation?

3. Claus Scherer worked for Rockwell International and was paid over $300,000 per year. Rockwell fired Scherer for alleged sexual harassment of several workers, including his secretary, Terry Pendy. Scherer sued in United States District Court, alleging that Rockwell’s real motive in firing him was his high salary. Rockwell moved for summary judgment, offering deposition transcripts of various employees. Pendy’s deposition detailed instances of harassment, including comments about her body, instances of unwelcome touching, and discussions of extramarital affairs. Another deposition, from a Rockwell employee who investigated the allegations, included complaints by other employees as to Scherer’s harassment. In his own deposition, which he offered to oppose summary judgment, Scherer testified that he could not recall the incidents alleged by Pendy and others. He denied generally that he had sexually harassed anyone. The district court granted summary judgment for Rockwell. Was its ruling correct?

4. Annie and Bart are coworkers. In fact, they share a cubicle wall. Recently, they were involved in a fender-bender in the company parking lot. Each blames the other for the accident, and the two have stopped speaking. Would you advise them to try to settle their dispute through arbitration, mediation, or with a traditional lawsuit? Why?

5. Raul lives in Georgia. He creates custom paintings and sells them at a weekly art fair near Atlanta. Sarah lives in Vermont. While on vacation in Georgia, she buys one of Raul’s paintings for $500. Soon after she returns home, she decides the painting is ugly, calls Raul, and demands a refund. Raul refuses. Sarah wants to sue him in

Vermont. Raul has never been to Vermont and has never sold a painting to anyone else from Vermont. Do Vermont courts have personal jurisdiction over Raul? Why or why not?

ESSAYQUESTIONS (Chapter 4)

1. In the early 1970s, President Richard Nixon became embroiled in the Watergate dispute. He was accused of covering up a criminal break-in at the national headquarters of the Democratic Party. Nixon denied any wrongdoing. A United States District Court judge ordered the president to produce tapes of conversations held in his office. Nixon knew that complying with the order would produce damaging evidence, probably destroying his presidency. He refused, claiming executive privilege. The case went to the Supreme Court. Nixon strongly implied that even if the Supreme Court ordered him to produce the tapes, he would refuse. What major constitutional issue did this raise?

2. Gilleo opposed American participation in the war in the Persian Gulf. She displayed a large sign on her front lawn that read,“Say No to War in the Persian Gulf, Call Congress Now.” The city of Ladue prohibited signs on front lawns, and Gilleo sued. The city claimed that it was regulating“time, place, and manner.”Explain that statement, and decide who should win.

3. YOU BE THE JUDGE WRITING PROBLEM:An off-duty, out-of-uniform police officer and his son purchased some food from a 7-11 store and were still in the parking lot when a carload of teenagers became rowdy. The officer went to speak to them and the teenagers assaulted him. The officer shouted to his son to get the 7-11 clerk to call for help. The son entered the store, told the clerk that a police officer needed help, and instructed the clerk to call the police. He returned 30 seconds later and repeated the request, urging the clerk to say it was a Code 13. The son claimed that the clerk laughed at him and refused to do it. The policeman sued the store.Argument for the Store:We sympathize with the policeman and his family, but the store has no liability. A bystander is not obligated to come to the aid of anyone in distress unless the bystander created the peril, and obviously the store did not do so. The policeman should sue those who attacked him.Argument for the Police Officer:We agree that, in general, a bystander has no obligation to come to the aid of one in distress. However, when a business that is open to the public receives an urgent request to call the police, the business should either make the call or permit someone else to do it.

4. Until recently, every state had a statute outlawing the burning of American flags. But inTexas v. Johnson, the Supreme Court declared such statutes unconstitutional, saying that flag burning is symbolic speech, protected by the First Amendment. Does Congress have the power to overrule the Court’s decision?

5. You begin work at Everhappy Corp. at the beginning of November. On your second day at work, you wear a political button on your overcoat, supporting your choice for governor in the upcoming election. Your boss glances at it and says,“Get that stupid thing out of this office or you’re history, chump.” You protest that his statement (a) violates your constitutional rights and (b) uses a boring cliche. Are you right?

Answer one of the Essay Questions located at the end of chapters 1-4 in Introduction to Business Law. Answer one question for each chapter. Each fully developed response (250-400 words) should include the following:

A clear introduction and conclusion
A thorough statement of the problem
A thorough explanation of the solution to the problem
Identify the chapter and question number you are answering.

APA format is not required, but solid academic writing is expected.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the assignment criteria and expectations for successful completion of the assignment.

Textbook

Beatty, J., Samuelson, S., & Bredeson, D. (2013). Introduction to Business Law, Fourth Edition. South-Western Cengage Learning.

Order your essay today and save 20% with the discount code: ESSAYHELP
Order your essay today and save 20% with the discount code: ESSAYHELPOrder Now